For The Love Of Port

The Symington Family will declare their 2018 Single Quinta Vintage Ports on May, 14th, digitally!!

https://grandesescolhas.com/inedito-sym ... vintage-2/

2018 Ramos Pinto Quinta de Ervamoira VP announced.

Fonseca Guimaraens too

Taylor's has just declared a classic VP for 2018: https://twitter.com/TaylorsPortWine/sta ... 94373?s=20

I don't know about you, but I was pretty surprised.

I don't know about you, but I was pretty surprised

The old adage about London buses comes to mind:

You wait for ages, then three come along in a row..

Seriously though, a back to back declaration was a little risky, but this looks reckless - and messy.

None of my spies has much good to say about the '19 vintage, and there was some hope that if '20 came up trumps there could have been a nice show of unity with a fully supported general declaration. With first Sogrape and now Taylor declaring '18, that seems much less likely now..

I mean, if the wine is good, then why not do a hat trick? I originally got the '17 specifically because it was back to back. After hearing about the treble I went back and bought the '16 and now will definitely buy the '18 when it comes to the US. It's not like the '16 and '17 were considered bad vintages.

Sandeman avoided this by not making the declaring '17, and now the '18 is supposed to be "their best ever." But by many accounts the '17 was superb also.

Of course, if they keep on getting good vintages from global warming or better technology I'm sure the bar for declaring a vintage will go up. I doubt we'll see another back to back to back until I'm old and tired, if not in the ground.

The old adage about London buses comes to mind:

You wait for ages, then three come along in a row..

Good one

Seriously though, a back to back declaration was a little risky, but this looks reckless - and messy.

Interesting. Care to elaborate?
Because it will cast doubt on the quality of Taylor's 2018 VP? But if Sogrape also declared, couldn't it be the other way instead: Symington being the only major player not to declare, couldn't they be the ones looked upon with suspicion?


Here's a very recent interview by David Guimaraens to Revista de Vinhos (in Portuguese, sorry) about the 2018 Fladgate vintages:
https://www.facebook.com/revistadevinho ... 781757081/

Taylor will delay the release of the 2018 until 2021. Indicates two things: 1. they have plenty of VP inventory, which isn't a big surprise. 2. they are not planning to declare 2019, which also isn't a big surprise.

Taylor will delay the release of the 2018 until 2021. Indicates two things: 1. they have plenty of VP inventory, which isn't a big surprise. 2. they are not planning to declare 2019, which also isn't a big surprise.

I would say it almost certainly due to the fact that launch events will not be possible this year due to CV

I am of the contrary opinion
Tom's perspective seems more accurate
With a large inventory and the outlook of 2019 being a subpar harvest
Their was no pressing need to release earlier

What confuses me is that TFP is declaring for Taylor Fladgate but only their 2nd label for Fonseca (Guimaraens)? Was there that much variability?

Mike J. W. wrote: ↑Sun Apr 26, 2020 10:15 am What confuses me is that TFP is declaring for Taylor Fladgate but only their 2nd label for Fonseca (Guimaraens)? Was there that much variability?

What that implies to me - along with the fact that not all producers are declaring - is that 2018 is a marginal year. And by "marginal" I mean only that it's borderline whether or not it is suited to being a fully declared vintage, not that the output or end product will be of marginal quality. Years like that used to mean that we'd get a partial declaration, typically only from smaller producers, and also used to end up providing us with some fantastic SQVPs from the larger producers.

Sounds like Vargellas was on point but that maybe Panascal was not. They're pretty far apart in the Douro so in a marginal or borderline year it's not at all surprising that one might produce VP and the other "only" SQVP. Note that the Pinhão-area "backbone" quintas predominantly went SQVP with the notable exception of Seixo (Sandeman).

I also note that even though Graham's raved about the quality of the Port Arthur grapes, they did not declare a Stone Terraces. My suspicion is that those grapes are being used in the announced Malvedos SQVP to boost its quality.

Is Seixo a SQVP for Sandeman or is it just considered a VP? Is Sandeman Seixo replacing the regular Sandeman VP going forward?

Well , all I know is that Sogrape said that Sandeman has declared a vp for 2018

Mike J. W. wrote: ↑Sun Apr 26, 2020 10:58 am Is Seixo a SQVP for Sandeman or is it just considered a VP? Is Sandeman Seixo replacing the regular Sandeman VP going forward?

Seixo is SQVP. Sogrape declared a full Sandeman VP for 2016 and 2018, but a Seixo SQVP for 2017 (though some reviewers have it near the top of the 2017 vintage).

Mike J. W. wrote: ↑Sun Apr 26, 2020 10:58 am Is Seixo a SQVP for Sandeman or is it just considered a VP? Is Sandeman Seixo replacing the regular Sandeman VP going forward?

The first thing to understand is that SQVP is not officially a category. It's simply slang that us Port-lovers use to refer to the Vintage Ports that producers release in years that they don't feel that the product lives up to the standards that they have for their general declaration.

That said, there are actually rules that apply to what we call SQVP. In order to use "Quinta [name]" on the label, the grapes must come from the Quinta named on the label. (Off the top of my head I cannot recall if it must be 100% of the grapes or if some fraction may be from other properties.)

Also, sometimes a producer will produce both a "regular" Vintage Port and a SQVP in the same year. Not often, but it does occasionally happen.

And then lastly, us Port-lovers tend to lump 2nd labels in with SQVP under that term. Fonseca Guimaraens, for example, is a 2nd label. There is no Quinta named "Guimaraens" so it isn't really a Single Quinta Vintage Port. Like I said... it's a slang term, not an official category.

So... I brought up Seixo in reference to the Pinhao-area quintas because Sandeman has declared a "regular" Sandeman VP for 2018, not a Sandeman Quinta do Seixo (SQ)VP. I think just about every other producer whose main quinta is in the Pinhao area has declared a SQVP instead of a "regular" VP. Dow's Quinta do Bomfim and Croft's Quinta da Roeda, for example.

Fun fact: Sandeman also has a 2nd label - Sandeman Vau Vintage. So in theory you could see a Sandeman Vintage Port, a Sandeman Vau Vintage Port, and a Sandeman Quinta do Seixo Vintage Port all from the same year.

Is Seixo a SQVP for Sandeman or is it just considered a VP?

Further to what Glenn said, you will worry yourself into an early grave trying to work out which is which.

Take Fonseca Guimaraens - a second wine in undeclared years, but not linked to any quinta - VP or SQVP?

Or Croft VP, which sometimes comes entirely from Q. Roeda..

And when you talk to the producers, you realise that they regard the quinta names as little more than brand names. If the Quinta in question had a really lousy harvest, they will often look to see if they can make the 'single quinta' offering from the other quintas they own or growers they buy from.

VP is VP - don't try to sub-categorise.!

you can add Noval to the list

2018 Quinta da Romaneira has been declared

Andy Velebil wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 4:09 am 2018 Quinta da Romaneira has been declared

Now is that a SQVP or just a VP?